[ad_1]
The left suddenly grabbed Joe Biden, with the help of the media.
It was inevitable that some of the more liberal candidates would take it to Joe because he is able to stand for the nomination unless he is being bullied.
And the journalists are ready for any attempted assassination because they want a competitive race, and Biden turns it into a snooze-a-thon.
THE ATTACK OF DE BLASIO ON THE RETURNS OF BIDEN, THE MACHINE OF SPARKS ON THE SOCIAL MEDIA
In addition, many journalists and experts agree that Biden is not liberal enough. And simmering in the background is a little embarrassing, they predicted that Biden would be such a weak candidate; retroactive revenge would not bother them.
It took the former vice president one day before yielding last night to the Hyde amendment. It does not matter that his more liberal rivals use it to taunt him. It does not matter that the press relies overwhelmingly on critics of abortion rights advocates and describes Biden's position as a moral failure.
He had adopted a position, the same as for decades, on principle. And then he melted.
Before the brutal overthrow, a New York Times article quoted the president of Naral Pro-Choice America and the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. An article from The Hill quoted the same leader of Naral Pro-Choice America, a Naral Pro-Choice Virginia activist and an activist from the All Above All Action Fund, another advocacy group. A Politico report quoted an executive of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. It's pretty typical, a stream of stories and segments in which no pro-life group is given, even a token comment.
The Hyde amendment, a 40-year-old measure named in memory of Henry Hyde, a GOP congressman, prohibits federal funds from being used for abortions.
Bill Clinton supported the Hyde amendment. Barack Obama has not tried to repeal the Hyde amendment, even with a Democratic Congress. Surveys indicate almost 60% support for this measure.
I understand now that the party has gone on the issue. And I understand the argument that the ban imposed by federal aid prevents poor and minority women from having an abortion.
BIDEN & # 39; MISHEARD & # 39; THE QUESTION OF AN ACLU ACTIVIST ABOUT HYDE AMENDMENT: CAMPAIGN
What I do not see in most of these stories and these segments, is a recognition from the other side: Millions of strongly pro-life Americans would be offended by the fact that their Taxes are used to finance a procedure that they equate to murder. And only a few journalists noted that Biden, a Catholic politician, was perhaps defending a ground of understanding in which he believed.
SIGN UP FOR THE PODCAST BUZZMETER MEDIA MEDIA, A RIFF OF THE MOST HISTORIC DAYS
I will say that I do not find Biden very agile when these controversies break out. His campaign issued a statement claiming that the Hyde amendment did not prevent groups that provide women with "vital health services" to secure federal funds, and that it would " open to the repeal "if access to abortion was further reduced. But he should have dealt with it himself rather than leaving a void that allowed the pressure to grow stronger.
The Washington Post has published an opinion piece by Danielle Campoamor, editor-in-chief of Romper, claiming that Biden "puts under the bus the people he most needs support at a time when they are particularly vulnerable" . Biden is, she says, "unfit to lead".
Notice how sticking to the position that was traditional democratic politics just three years ago has become a miserable moral mistake?
Biden needed a vine leaf to cover his flip-flop. Last night, he explained how the Republican governors of some states were passing extreme laws restricting access to abortion or banning the procedure after a while. But this was the case when Biden decided to stay on Hyde.
He had a choice: to stand up to his increasingly progressive party on the issue of federal funding or to follow the leftist crowd. And he sent a signal that he was ready to bow to win the nomination.
The other controversy, which is not a problem in my opinion, is the return of "plagiarism".
Biden was humiliated in 1987, during his first run for president, when he raised the words of other politicians. This made him out of the race and has since become a scar.
But journalists are trying to link this to botched work by campaign staff.
In developing a long-term plan on climate change and another on education, staff cited passages, facts and figures from policy organizations without proper attribution. Is this a good practice? No, but Biden was not even personally involved.
MICHAEL KNOWLES: CAN JOE BIDEN WIN CURRENTLY?
In addition, all campaigns do some copy-and-paste work when compiling these dense political dome. Check out this Politico second day title:
"The Democrats of 2020 have a widespread practice of lifting policy."
"A POLITICO magazine has found documents already published on the official Sens campaign websites. Kamala Harris and Bernie Sanders, as well as frequent use of facts and data without mentioning many others".
So why was only Biden beaten? Because it's tempting for the Washington Post, for example, to tell this story:
"The plagiarism scandal of 1987 in Echoes de Biden continues to reverberate."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Sorry, it's not a story that real voters will care about anything.
Biden will make a lot of mistakes in this campaign. But there will rarely be cases as clear as the manner in which it has been aborted. It was his first defeat of the primaries.
[ad_2]
Source link